MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390193729 · doi:10.1002/alz.075609

Evolution of behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia in the logopenic variant of primary progressive aphasia

2023· article· en· W4390193729 on OpenAlexaff
Tastevin Tastevin, Robert Laforce, Monica Lavoie, Élizabeth Poulin, Justine De La Sablonnière, Julie Carrier‐Auclair

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsHôpital de l'Enfant-JésusUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsApathyPrimary progressive aphasiaDementiaAnxietyDepression (economics)MedicinePsychiatryCohortDiseaseFrontotemporal dementiaAphasiaPediatricsClinical psychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The logopenic variant of primary progressive aphasia (lvPPA) is known to be associated with behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) such as depression and apathy. However, few data are available regarding the evolution of BPSD, particularly in advanced stages and end of life, which is often of great concern for patients and families. Method We performed a retrospective chart review in a cohort including 42 deceased patients with a diagnosis of lvPPA. Symptoms of BPSD were assessed from disease onset to death by three experienced raters and, when possible, interviews were performed with proxies of patients to complete the missing data. Result Depression and anxiety were mostly prevalent at the early stages but decreased over time. In particular, at one‐year after first visit, 36% of the patients were affected by anxiety symptoms and 19% were suffering from depressive symptoms. Apathy increased with the follow‐up with a peak at 5 years from the first clinical visit (46% of the patients). Other BPSD such as rituals, hyperorality, or agitation were less prevalent throughout the disease. Nevertheless, patients frequently presented with dishinibition during the follow‐up (between 20‐36% of the patients during the 5 years following the first visit). Antidepressants were used in around 20‐28% of the patients from first visit to later stages, followed by anxiolytics (3‐22%). Antipsychotics were mostly used in the advanced stages. At the first visit, 42% of the patients were treated with acetylcholinesterase inhibitors. During the follow up, this rate fluctuated between 40‐64%. Conclusion Affective symptoms were most prevalent in prodromal and early stages, whereas in the advanced stages, lvPPA was mostly characterized by apathy. Dishinibition was also frequent during the follow‐up. These findings could support a psychiatric assessment in the early stages, since depression and anxiety are known to respond well to psychotropic treatment.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.310 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→